Jay Bookman attributes such a change in attitude to the different “historical experience” of the 18-29 demographic who do not even remember the fall of the Berlin Wall. Those under age 40 have lived their adult lives “in a world in which communism was no longer a grave threat to capitalism.”

According to Bookman, the capitalism they have seen is a more ruthless capitalism than that of their parents’ and grandparents’ generations:

After 1989, with its competitor [communism] vanquished, capitalism in effect began to exert its monopoly power. It became rougher, less paternal and more aggressive. If income for the already wealthy soared while the pay of working class Americans stagnated or even declined, well, too bad. It was justified as Darwinian justice, a form of justice much different from the concept of economic justice that had been in effect prior to 1989.

With the decline in family cohesion, religious faith, and community, today’s young conservatives are likely to adhere to a Darwinian style of capitalism. They reveal a resentment of Baby Boomers, and even blame them for “ruining their lives” with overspending. College sophomore Sarah Westwood, in the Wall Street Journal, recently lectured her Republican elders about updating “Grandpa’s adage of tax less, spend less” and breaking with the “gay-bashing and Bible-thumping fringe.”

While Ayn Rand-style fiscal conservatism may appeal to some young adults, others educated in a system that emphasizes emotional empathy for the “oppressed” are likely to reject it as mean-spirited and hateful.

Going back to the reflective and reflexive responses to the election loss, it seems that such analysts are putting the cart before the horse. There might be some truth to their assertions that race, ethnicity, and age determined election outcomes and that these groups need to be courted to win future elections.

But are demographics political destiny?

We can look at the case of Allen West, a black Tea Party member of Congress, who lost the election to a younger white man. While the media is quick to vilify on the basis of perceived racism or sexism, no such discussion has entered debates about Republicans. In my own state house district in Georgia, a black female Republican candidate was able to win only 25 percent of the vote against the entrenched white female Democrat, who did everything to shut her out from community debates where she has a virtual monopoly. It is said she is courting a young white male Democrat to be her replacement when she soon retires. Or consider the case of Mia Love, who attempted to become the first black Republican woman elected to Congress. Her opponent, Jim Matheson, is white and male, and supported by liberals who otherwise raise the flag for racial and gender “diversity.”

Among the statements that have made Allen West a pariah among liberals, both black and white, are his charges about communism against progressive members of Congress — who are in fact members of communist and socialist parties. West is charged with “Red-baiting” in insulting profiles, like the one by Tim Murphy in Mother Joneslast summer.

The societal shift allowed President Obama, in the third debate, to ridicule Mitt Romney’s fears about Russia: “The Cold War’s been over for twenty years.” Such implied charges of paranoia about communism obscure the very real threats now coming from Putin’s resurgent dictatorial regime. But Obama’s ridicule is typical, and it is intended to cut off discussion.

The Pew Poll reflects my anecdotal observations in the college classroom over the past twenty years. Students automatically associate communism with the “red scare” and “McCarthyism.” Any charges of communist sympathies are likely to be seen as “red-baiting.” Their knowledge about communism, if they have any, is sketchy and slanted.

This is because their history lessons focus on the movements of the 1960s, namely the civil rights movement, which is presented as a triumphal victory of good over evil. The leader is Martin Luther King, Jr., whose method of taking to the streets is now seen as the preferred method of political change. In this morality play of history, those who did not wholeheartedly take up the cause and “march” are presented as evil bigots. Those who did, the same radicals who have shaped our education system, are presented as avatars of good.

Left out of this history, however, are those like George Schuyler and Reverend Joseph H. Jackson, who promoted a patriotic and economic method for overcoming discrimination. Black advocates for civil rights such as Homer Smith, who wrote a book about his experiences in the Soviet Union, are simply ignored.

In many ways, Conservative Stockholm Syndrome is a kissing cousin to ‘Oslo Syndrome:Delusions of a People Under Siege’.

One must consider the parallels at a very serious level. To be sure, Jews have a reputation for being significant over achievers, highly educated and successful to boot. Many are. In fact, the out-sized proportion – of the smallest minority group on this bleeding planet – has won more Nobel prizes than most other nations, including the largest. Nevertheless, they are blind as bats and dumb as posts, when it comes to beating back their enemies.

In no small measure, their ritualistic mea culpas are not only counter productive, but they are indeed the by products of Oslo/Stockholm Syndrome!

Don’t believe this blogger. Fine. But do believe Dr. Kenneth Levin. As such, see this -http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/08/23/when-does-delusional-thinking-become-a-pathological-illness-more-us-rabbis-support-obama-than-in-2008-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/

I can attest that colleges teach virtually nothing about communism these days. Most college students haven’t a clue about Mao, Marx, dialectical materialism, Stalin or the gulag. Why? Marxist teachers.

That is why we sent our kids to conservative Christian universities. We did not want to waste our money & actually wanted them to learn something.

“While only 24 percent of whites viewed socialism favorably, 55 percent of blacks did and 44 percent of Hispanics did. Favorable opinions of socialism have an inverse relationship to age: the most support comes from those aged 18 to 29. Forty-nine percent of young respondents gave a favorable rating to socialism, while only 34 percent of the 30 to 49 age group did, only 25 percent of the 50 to 64 age group did, and a mere 13 percent of those above 65 did.”

This is the greatest danger the republic faces today. Unfortunately, I think the last election proved that socialism has won in this country. More and more people in this nation want “free stuff,” or at least feel that they are entitled to it. Once that group of people reaches 50%, you’re done. As the soon-to-be defunct Newsweek magazine said a few years back, “We are all socialists now.”

And please spare me the argument about some of the people in Romney’s 47% being Social Security, Medicare, Food Stamp, welfare, veterans, or Federal pension recipients. That argument may be true, but it also is irrelevant. All of these people still either depend on or demand a government check each month and will vote for anybody who will keep the process going. It doesn’t really matter that they paid into the system and it doesn’t really matter that both Democrats and Republicans so mismanaged Social Security and Medicare that both of those programs are about to go bust. These people still want checks every month and they will vote for anybody who will guarantee them those monthly checks.

And let’s not even talk about the hard-core takers in this country. Many people, especially illegal immigrants, come to the United States for the benefits and the government handouts. Don’t believe me? Just go to California and see how much that state has to pay out each year to deal with illegal immigrants. And even many “legal” immigrants there have family members who come here who are not legal. When all of these people eventually do become citizens, they will continue to vote for the party that guarantees them the most “free” stuff, and that party has traditionally been the Democratic party. If you honestly think that hispanics will vote for Republicans in droves if only they supported immigration reform or amnesty, dream on. Ronald Reagan GAVE them amnesty and it did not make a big difference in how hispanics voted, and that was with a booming Reagan economy as well. Face it, the vast majority of these people will only vote for the real, hard, “free” benefits that can be delivered to them each year, and that is always the domain of the Democratic party.

But the most disturbing trend with the above figures are the number of young people that are now comfortable and supportive of socialism. Even though socialism goes against everything in our own Constitution, our far-left teachers, universities, public schools, and faculties have done their job well in indoctrinating our kids into believing that socialism is the only “humane” way to go. Forget the fact that our Constitution has made this country the most powerful nation on this planet. Forget that. According to these monsters, we will only be a “humane” and “enlightened” nation if we become more like France or Great Britain and embrace socialism. Van Jones, MoveOn.org, the Daily Kos, Media Matters, all of them understand the value of propaganda (just like Stalin did) and know that if you really want to take over a country, you take the long view and indoctrinate the children. I just wonder how many of these same teachers, universities, and public schools teach about the power and strength of capitalism and all of the many benefits they have bestowed on to this country. I’ll bet you not many of them have, and THAT is why we are where we are today with young people. If they have been taught from Middle School to hate or at least be leary of our current form of government, it’s no major surprise that they will embrace whatever panacea is handed to them by far-left liberal grade schools, high schools, and colleges.

So are we screwed? Maybe. I’m really not that optimistic. The way you hear elite establishment Republicans talking today, our only hope is to become just like the Democrats and “reach out” to hispanics, blacks, and single moms, which basically means we have to show that we can offer as much free stuff as the Democrats to get their votes. And I doubt these same people are going to want to hear lectures on how free-market capitalism will improve their lot in life. They want money and benefits NOW and are not interested in the philosophies of John Stuart Mill or Alexis de Tocqueville. And people like Obama are more than willing to give it to them to advance their socialist agenda.

I don’t really know how you fight that line of thinking. Heck, given today’s youth and the number of Americans either getting money from the government or working FOR the government, I don’t even know if Ronald Reagan could get elected today. Our only hope may be in creating a party like the Tea Party and get rid of the establishment Republicans. At least the people in the Tea Party stand for something and would give Americans a reason for taking back Congress from the socialists. We already have the House, so now we have to focus on getting control of the Senate with good candidates, like Rand Paul. If we can do that, at least we can stop a president like Obama from implementing is entire socialist agenda. I think that’s the best we can hope for and that makes 2014 very, very, important.

A good story will capture the immagination much better than real numbers. Consider that Jesus taught a lot through parables.

What if in Oct there had been a short video, preferably longer, but even a short video summing up what happened in Bengazhi as an action video. We tie the Ambassador as a loved son (and the other members who died as sons and fathers). Then show the villian who wouldn’t help … who refused to exercise his ‘national command authority’ to send in the help. Show sodiers in Sicilly grounded and un able to move, show the one former seal who disobade and went to help, etc etc.

I think the fictional Julia story resonated wiht those who see the Gov’t as helping. We must begin to tell stories, compelling stories, first on youtube, later wherever will take them that are stories of how peopel are crushed by the gov’t. THAT is how we fight them.

I think the only way to fight the kind of socialist thinking we are talking about is with one or two VERY simple concepts, that can break through the skulls of the vaunted “low-information (aka “stupid”)” voters the Democrats have so gleefully acknowledged won the election for them.

We need to hammer away at these simple concepts as the economy and nation goes into the free-fall that so many of us are correctly convinced is inevitable, and that is probably worth forcing now rather than later. Hammer the one-two punch of their world collapsing around them, and these two simple concepts.

So, here are the two simple statements that conservatives not only have to say, but say over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again –

1) YOU ARE BEING LIED TO, AND HAVE BEEN FOR DECADES! (By the MSM, academia, and the culture)

2) WHAT YOU ARE LIVING RIGHT NOW IS NO ACCIDENT. IT IS TOO BIG TO BE AN ACCIDENT (q. Ayn Rand). THIS WAS DONE DELIBERATELY, METHODICALLY, AND WITH PROFOUND MALICE AFORETHOUGHT.

Keep hammering and hammering and hammering at these two very simple, and 100% TRUE!!!, ideas, and I am betting they will sink in.

And if they don’t, we are probably doomed beyond redemption anyway, so we might as well try.

And you must give a name to it, otherwise there’s no “target to freeze, isolate, destroy” (Alinsky).

“International Communist Conspiracy” worked before. But now it’s much bigger with many more top echelon organizations and individuals both public and shadow worldwide. And it has 170 year old, well developed epistemology upon which to draw — since the Russian “realism” or nihilist movements.

sure the republican party leadership is more left then some democrats that the term RINO is already obsolete.

the main reason romney lost was the obama machine cheated big. really really BIG.

while not a fan of romney he would have been a better president …hell Putin would be a better president then the cheating lying obama …who has yet to prove his eligibility.

those who argued it was a red herring or a diversion are the ones who allowed obama to hold office in the first place. all the media and “conservative pundits” who dismissed the eligibility requirements are the main ones responsible for the the fraud who presently occupies the WH.

the entire GOP needs to be replaced with conservatives. 100% of them …the democrats are just doing what democrats do but why vote for a republican who does what democrats do?

Observations:
Conservatism wins every time it’s on the ballot.
Moderation loses every time it’s on the ballot.
Liberalism cannot withstand an ideological debate.
In 2008, the GOP ran away from an ideological debate and lost.
In 2010, the TEA Party candidates ran ideological campaigns and cleaned up.

Conclusions:
The 2012 election turned out the way the GOP Establishment wanted.
The GOP Establishment would rather lose than have to govern according to Conservative Principles.

Which, of course, is borne out by the fact that the only time the GOP Establishment gets animated is when they are attacking Conservatives.

Conservatives have to understand that they are disempowered outsiders now. They are the counter culture to the New Left Zeitgeist.

They better start acting like it.

And White Europeans need to organize to fight the demonization and ill treatment.

Everyone has to adjust to the New Left Establishment, Zeitgeist, New Normal….not to accept it, but just to realize that it is the Ascendent and Ascended Zeitgeist, Establishment…and adjust tactics and strategies accordingly.

I am not sure I could vote for anyone whose favorite rap artist is Eminem. If it was Arrested Development or some kind of positive message rap I could accept that. Eminem, really? I’m not sure I like Marco Rubio anymore.

To win elections, the Republican party must appeal to Hispanics, Blacks, and Asians. So say the pollsters, who have divided the American people into races, polled the races to learn their racial desires, and have persuaded the politicians to use the state to fulfill their racial desires. There are two words to describe this: racial socialism.

The appeal of racism and socialism to the darkest, vilest desires in human nature is undeniable. The power of racism and socialism to the human heart and head is apparent: the success of the Nazi, Democrat, and Communist parties is demonstrated.

And, so say the pundits, pollsters, and politicians to win elections, this must become the guiding philosophy of the Republican Party as it has become that of the Democrat Party.

This is a complete repudiation of the American people. No one questions the division of the people into races by the pollsters and politicians. The racial categories are the apex determinant of voter interest. There is no “enlightened electorate,” no “human rights,” there are only competing races with racial interests, each with its own racial rights. People do not wish to be free, work hard, and be self-reliant; they dream only of the power of their La Raza and wish to despoil and plunder other races.

There are, however, two more powerful appeals than racist socialism, which is why the Democrat/Nazi Party seeks to crush one and co-opt the other. Malcolm X himself said it: “I have never before seen sincere and true brotherhood practiced by all colors together, irrespective of their color.”

Yes, religion. There are only two universalist religions: Christianity and Islam. Malcolm X could never forgive Christianity for liberating him from slavery, so he chose Islam. America should not choose Islam, but if America is to survive without being transformed into the racialist, socialist state of Obamunism, it must choose.

The Republicans must be come an explicit Christian party that appeals to Christians of all races. Or it will become an echo of racialist, socialist party of the Democrat Party.

Pretty much what I have been thinking. I’m beginning to realize that liberals demonstrated far more street smarts than us: by stacking the educational system with union loyalists they have successfully seized the minds of our young through those teachers and in turn furthered their hold on the press. Our only way forward is to educate, which unfortunately will not show success for several generations. A few years back I decided not to pursue my PHD while in my 50s, something I wanted to allow me to teach at the college level. Then I realized who holds the power in most higher-learning institutes and decided that path would be for naught.

Try this for a principle: Freedom and liberty for all American citizens. If any issue you support or defend lacks this underlying principle as a foundation, you need to re-think your position on that issue. related: freedom of association, freedom to engage in contracts, etc.

Note: This is where conservatives often go wrong, confusing and conflating their personal morality, ethics and religious beliefs for principles in the secular realm of governance. This is a secular nation, not a christian nation. There is a difference. Otherwise, we must decide which religion, denomination or sect gets to run the government and be done with it. State reglions always, but always, limit the freedoms and liberties of some or all of it’s citizens.

Note: Please research the definitions of ‘principle’, ‘standard’ etc. I don’t think they mean what you think it mean.

Currently, principles and standards of conservatives are often somewhat arbitrary. A current issue wrt the difference between religious sacraments of marriage and that of secular civil contracts is only one example of many. iow, according to many conservatives, civl contracts are ok, and freedom and libety os a good thing, but only if it doesn’t violate your own religious doctrines and teachings. That’s not a ‘principle.’ That’s moral relativism.

Principles are unchangeable, e.g. inalienable rights, freedom and liberty, etc.. Relativism changes each and every time, depending on context and interpretation.

Recommendations:

Stop with all of the moral relativism (includes blaming others for your own failures) and find some principles.

The republicans will never learn that in order to cure some severe diseases, you have to evoke the worst of it, bring it out into the open, image it, let it run a course.. so that it becomes obvious to everyone. All the repubics do is delay the inevitable destruction of the US. Let it happen.. when things get so bad that people have to move dead bodies from their driveway to go to the store, then they may wake up. STOP trying to fix what cannot be stopped. This is like pouring a jug of drano down the drain to fix what is a major plumbing disaster. Your efforts only cover up the disease of the demorats and the leftist scum that has infested the countryside. It may be that a real war is going to be needed.. yes, face it. This is a WAR.

“The societal shift allowed President Obama, in the third debate, to ridicule Mitt Romney’s fears about Russia: “The Cold War’s been over for twenty years.” Such implied charges of paranoia about communism obscure the very real threats now coming from Putin’s resurgent dictatorial regime. But Obama’s ridicule is typical, and it is intended to cut off discussion.”

The threat is not from present-day Russia, which is content with managing its own affairs in its near abroad and has no interest in encroaching on any legitimate political or economic interests of the US.

But rather, the threat is from the leftovers of the former Soviet Union, including the entire left-wing infrastructure that gave rise to Barack Hussein Obama.